Pakatan Harapan needs to pull itself together. Its political messaging and campaign tactics have lost their effectiveness, and its humiliating wipeout in Sabah was already a glaring warning sign.
Instead, it resorted to juvenile fearmongering, most embarrassingly exemplified by DAP deputy chairperson Nga Kor Ming.
The tactic backfired spectacularly, dealing a resounding blow to a coalition that is already haemorrhaging voter support and public trust.
Harapan took its loyal supporters for fools, believing its tired and increasingly irrelevant battle cry and Nga's childish attempts to use Rosmah Mansor as a political diversion would still resonate.
It threw every trick in the book at the campaign, yet kept pulling the same rabbit out of the hat, an appeal that has long since lost its potency with voters.
Even so, it seemed to believe that a token effort would somehow deliver a landslide victory. Again, it took the people of Johor for fools, only to face their seething wrath.
Unpacking the sentiments
As a Johorean, I will attempt to unpack the sentiments that appear to have shaped the state’s political mood. It is really not rocket science. Voters are often far more practical than politicians give them credit for.
The 1MDB narrative has lost much of its political mileage. For years, the issue was the centrepiece of the opposition’s campaign against BN, but the Johor results suggest that the issue no longer carries the same weight among many voters as it once did.
The political silver bullet that was expected to end BN’s appeal appears to have lost its impact. The old script is no longer producing the same reaction.
Rosmah is no longer the figure that keeps voters awake at night; instead, concerns have shifted towards what they perceive as the arrogance of power.
The fear factor has changed. The issue is less about past personalities and more about whether those currently in power are seen as overconfident, disconnected or taking voters for granted.
For many Johoreans, bread-and-butter issues remain far more immediate than political narratives. Jobs, wages, economic opportunities and the future prospects of their children are concerns that cannot be solved through slogans or campaign rhetoric.
A voter may tolerate political differences, but uncertainty about employment and livelihoods is a far more pressing matter.
Livid Indian voters
The Indian community’s support for Harapan appears to have also weakened very, very significantly.
The fact that MIC, a party often written off as politically irrelevant within the community, managed to retain or win seats, including in contests against DAP, should serve as a wake-up call.
The message from some voters appears simple. It is not because they love BN, but it was “asalkan bukan Harapan” (as long as it is not Harapan). When a party once considered politically marginal can outperform expectations, it suggests a deeper dissatisfaction that cannot be dismissed so simply.
Beyond politics, voters also judge the government based on everyday realities, particularly the state of public education and healthcare.
I have received numerous complaints from government doctors and teachers voicing frustrations with the government's problem-solving approach in these matters.
They requested anonymity, of course, because the government would rather conduct a witch-hunt than actually address the problems mentioned.
These are not abstract policy discussions; they are services that directly affect families. When schools struggle and healthcare facilities remain under pressure, voters naturally question whether political promises have translated into meaningful improvements.
In the end, the Johor election may have reflected a familiar political instinct. Voters sometimes choose the villain they know over the friend they feel has quietly betrayed their trust.
It is not necessarily an endorsement of everything the old order represents, but rather a rejection of what some voters perceive as disappointment, overpromising or a lack of delivery from the alternative.
Lack of action on anti-corruption pledge
In fact, there have been quiet conversations within some quarters of the Indian community for a while now: yes, Najib "stole" money, but at least he provided livelihoods.
When this sentiment starts translating into voter apathy, it signals that Harapan is in deep trouble.
The fact that voters are willing to look past corruption of this scale suggests that Harapan has not done itself any favours on the anti-corruption front.
It also implies that whatever gains people expected from a cleaner government have failed to materialise in ways they can feel in their daily lives.
This is a telling admission. It suggests that, for a segment of voters, corruption is not judged in the abstract but weighed against tangible outcomes such as jobs, income, and opportunity.
If a leader seen as corrupt is remembered as someone who delivered on that front, while a government elected on a reform platform is seen as falling short economically, then the anti-corruption argument alone loses its persuasive power.
Disillusionment of this kind rarely stays confined to one community; it tends to be a warning sign of a broader erosion of trust that could shape voting behaviour well beyond the immediate group where it first takes root.
The lesson from Johor is perhaps uncomfortable for all sides. Voters may forgive old mistakes, but they are far less forgiving when they feel ignored.
The next litmus test in this? Negeri Sembilan state polls. All the best, Harapan. - Mkini
Yiswaree Palansamy is a member of the Malaysiakini team.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.